# TMEP § 1202.02(a)(ii): Purpose of Functionality Doctrine

> Federal · Agency guidance · In force

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1202.02(a)(ii)

## Section

- **Citation:** TMEP § 1202.02(a)(ii)
- **Heading:** Purpose of Functionality Doctrine
- **Jurisdiction:** Federal
- **Kind:** Agency guidance
- **Status:** In force
- **Text as of:** August 14, 2026
- **Source:** Compiled text
- **Location:** USPTO TMEP / Chapter 1200 - Substantive Examination of Applications / TMEP § 1202.02(a)(ii)

## Text

The functionality doctrine, which prohibits
registration of functional product features, is intended to encourage
legitimate competition by maintaining a proper balance between trademark law
and patent law. As the Supreme Court explained, in
Qualitex Co. v.
Jacobson Prods. Co.
, 514 U.S. 159, 164-165, 34 USPQ2d 1161,
1163 (1995):
The functionality doctrine prevents
trademark law, which seeks to promote competition by protecting a firm’s
reputation, from instead inhibiting legitimate competition by allowing a
producer to control a useful product feature. It is the province of
patent law, not trademark law, to encourage invention by granting
inventors a monopoly over new product designs or functions for a limited
time, 35 U.S.C. Sections  154, 173, after which competitors are free to
use the innovation. If a product’s functional features could be used as
trademarks, however, a monopoly over such features could be obtained
without regard to whether they qualify as patents and could be extended
forever (because trademarks may be renewed in perpetuity).
In other words, the functionality doctrine
ensures that protection for utilitarian product features be properly sought
through a limited-duration utility patent, and not through the potentially
unlimited protection of a trademark registration. Upon expiration of a
utility patent, the invention covered by the patent enters the public
domain, and the functional features disclosed in the patent may then be
copied by others – thus encouraging advances in product design and
manufacture. In
TrafFix Devices, Inc. v. Mktg. Displays,
Inc.
, 532 U.S. 23, 34-35, 58 USPQ2d 1001, 1007 (2001), the
Supreme Court reiterated this rationale, also noting that the functionality
doctrine is not affected by evidence of acquired distinctiveness.
Thus, even when the evidence establishes that
consumers have come to associate a functional product feature with a single
source, trademark protection will not be granted in light of the public
policy reasons stated.
Id
.

## Nearby sections

- [TMEP § 1201 Ownership of Mark](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.md)
- [TMEP § 1201.01 Claim of Ownership May Be Based on Use By Related Companies](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.01.md)
- [TMEP § 1201.02(a) Identifying the Applicant Properly](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.02(a).md)
- [TMEP § 1201.02(c) Correcting Errors in How the Applicant Is Identified](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.02(c).md)
- [TMEP § 1201.02(d) Operating Divisions](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.02(d).md)
- [TMEP § 1201.02(e) Changes in Ownership After Application Is Filed](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.02(e).md)
- [TMEP § 1201.03(a) No Explanation of Use of Mark by Related Companies or Applicant’s Control Over Use of Mark by Related Companies Required](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.03(a).md)
- [TMEP § 1201.03(b) Wholly Owned Related Companies](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.03(b).md)
- [TMEP § 1201.03(c) Common Stockholders, Directors, or Officers](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.03(c).md)
- [TMEP § 1201.03(e) License and Franchise Situations](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.03(e).md)
- [TMEP § 1201.04 Inquiry Regarding Parties Named on Specimens or Elsewhere in Record](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.04.md)
- [TMEP § 1201.05 Acceptable Claim of Ownership Based on Applicant’s Own Use](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.05.md)
- [TMEP § 1201.06(a) Applicant Is Merely Distributor or Importer](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.06(a).md)
- [TMEP § 1201.06(b) Goods Manufactured in a Country Other than Where Applicant Is Located](https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1201.06(b).md)

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/statutes/TMEP_S1202.02(a)(ii). Check the current official text before relying on it. Not legal advice.